# Educational Funding Disparity?



## Superbird (Feb 16, 2011)

Aobaru said:


> *For example, no white child today questions the presence of black children in his or her school*; during my grandparents time this idea was socially liberal and at the least criticized heavily.


And yet, my school district is about to pretty much fall apart because of an inverted case. See, apparently, out school system was one of the best in the country because of the 'diversity program' that bussed people all over the city so that there was /variety/ in every school. Now the conservatives who somehow got ahold of the school board want to change this. I think they're just racist and don't want their precious children making friends with poor black people.

Which is bull****.


----------



## Pwnemon (Feb 16, 2011)

*Re: Political Compass*



Superbird said:


> And yet, my school district is about to pretty much fall apart because of an inverted case. See, apparently, out school system was one of the best in the country because of the 'diversity program' that bussed people all over the city so that there was /variety/ in every school. Now the conservatives who somehow got ahold of the school board want to change this. I think they're just racist and don't want their precious children making friends with poor black people.
> 
> Which is bull****.


Yet most of the early arguments against such bussing programs were not "I'M RACIST LOL" but rather, "I paid a lot for a house in this nice school system and I don't want my kids to have to get bussed into a gang zone with a horrible school."


----------



## Superbird (Feb 16, 2011)

*Re: Political Compass*

That's the thing. There are no schools that are horrible. In fact, the better ones happen to be in these "gang zone" areas.


----------



## Crazy Linoone (Feb 17, 2011)

*Re: Political Compass*



Pwnemon said:


> Yet most of the early arguments against such bussing programs were not "I'M RACIST LOL" but rather, "I paid a lot for a house in this nice school system and I don't want my kids to have to get bussed into a gang zone with a horrible school."


But that's still racist, because black people do not automatically equal to gangsters, and getting rid of black people isn't necessarily going to get rid of the gang problem because the white kids at the school might be the gangsters and the poor black people have nothing to do with it. It's not like getting rid off all the black people will suddenly make all the white people become BFFS 4EVER.


----------



## Pwnemon (Feb 17, 2011)

*Re: Political Compass*



Crazy Linoone said:


> But that's still racist, because black people do not automatically equal to gangsters, and getting rid of black people isn't necessarily going to get rid of the gang problem because the white kids at the school might be the gangsters and the poor black people have nothing to do with it. It's not like getting rid off all the black people will suddenly make all the white people become BFFS 4EVER.


Did I say, "I DONT WANT BUSSED TO BLACK SCHOOLS" no i didn't. I just said that there's a few rotten apples in every barrel and how would you feel if you paid for a home in a good school system and then got bussed to some crap school.


----------



## Espeon (Feb 17, 2011)

*Re: Political Compass*



Pwnemon said:


> Did I say, "I DONT WANT BUSSED TO BLACK SCHOOLS" no i didn't. I just said that there's a few rotten apples in every barrel and how would you feel if you paid for a home in a good school system and then got bussed to some crap school.


And yet here you're implying that schools with a high population of coloured children are inherently crap? People shouldn't be allowed to pay money in order to have better educations, health care and soforth. Everyone should be entitled to the same basic rights such as education irrespective of their incomes, their social status, class, race, gender and soforth. At the end of the day, we're all human and no amount of money can change that.


----------



## Pwnemon (Feb 17, 2011)

*Re: Political Compass*



Espeon said:


> And yet here you're implying that schools with a high population of coloured children are inherently crap? People shouldn't be allowed to pay money in order to have better educations, health care and soforth. Everyone should be entitled to the same basic rights such as education irrespective of their incomes, their social status, class, race, gender and soforth. At the end of the day, we're all human and no amount of money can change that.


you're right. that's exactly what i'm implying. because everybody knows the entire point of bussing is to send white children to black schools and vacate the white schools.


----------



## Crazy Linoone (Feb 18, 2011)

*Re: Political Compass*



Pwnemon said:


> Did I say, "I DONT WANT BUSSED TO BLACK SCHOOLS" no i didn't. I just said that there's a few rotten apples in every barrel and how would you feel if you paid for a home in a good school system and then got bussed to some crap school.


If I'm actually misreading your posts, then I honestly apologize. However, I feel like you are implying racist comments, inadvertently or not, and I will attempt to explain my reasoning and hopefully we can figure out whether you're actually racist and do not realize it or I somehow missed your points. 



Superbird said:


> See, apparently, out school system was one of the best in the country because of the 'diversity program' that bussed people all over the city so that there was /variety/ in every school. Now the conservatives who somehow got ahold of the school board want to change this. I think they're just racist and don't want their precious children making friends with poor black people.





Pwnemon said:


> Yet most of the early arguments against such bussing programs were not "I'M RACIST LOL" but rather, "I paid a lot for a house in this nice school system and I don't want my kids to have to get bussed into a gang zone with a horrible school."


So, from what I understand, Superbird's bussing* system results in schools with relatively equal numbers of white and black people instead of having a school with mostly blacks, a school with mostly whites, etc. 

You replied to this post by putting up an argument against bussing, that nobody want their children in gang zones. The racist vibes I'm getting is mainly from here: Superbird never mentioned gangs or horrible schools, only "poor black people". Poor black people do not automatically to gangs or horrible schools. Thinking that black == gangs is racist (If you can't see why, then you're racist). 

The "Yet" in your sentence implies that your second claim ("I paid a lot for a house in this nice school system and I don't want my kids to have to get bussed into a gang zone with a horrible school.") is different from the first claim ("IM RACIST LOL"), aka not racist. As I've pointed out that the second claim is actually a racist statement, I feel like you're racist and do not realize your racism. 

*I'm just going to use "bussing" because I have no idea if there's an actual word for it.



Pwnemon said:


> you're right. that's exactly what i'm implying. because everybody knows the entire point of bussing is to send white children to black schools and vacate the white schools.


So yeah. Either you are subconsciously racist, or I have no idea what you're implying. :P


----------



## ultraviolet (Feb 18, 2011)

*Re: Political Compass*



			
				Pwnemon said:
			
		

> I just said that there's a few rotten apples in every barrel and how  would you feel if you paid for a home in a good school system and then  got bussed to some crap school.


has anyone here actually been to a school where there weren't horrible kids or gangs or bullies? do you think the crap schools are crap because... only children from lower-income families go there? I get the impression that you're not really thinking about this on a larger scale. isn't it better to try and set something up that will eventually benefit everyone (or most people) than just the rich?


----------



## Pwnemon (Feb 18, 2011)

*Re: Political Compass*



Crazy Linoone said:


> If I'm actually misreading your posts, then I honestly apologize. However, I feel like you are implying racist comments, inadvertently or not, and I will attempt to explain my reasoning and hopefully we can figure out whether you're actually racist and do not realize it or I somehow missed your points.
> 
> So, from what I understand, Superbird's bussing* system results in schools with relatively equal numbers of white and black people instead of having a school with mostly blacks, a school with mostly whites, etc.
> 
> ...


Superbird said that the reason that the bussing program was ended was because the people are racist. I tried to point out to him that the main opposition against bussing programs was not at all based upon race, but rather class, although looking back my arguments do seem very ambiguous. And the last thing you quoted was me being sarcastic.



ultraviolet said:


> has anyone here actually been to a school where there weren't horrible kids or gangs or bullies? do you think the crap schools are crap because... only children from lower-income families go there? I get the impression that you're not really thinking about this on a larger scale. isn't it better to try and set something up that will eventually benefit everyone (or most people) than just the rich?


Unless i'm mistaken, by trying to maintain an equal quota, you're disbenefiting just as much rich as you are benefiting poor people. Wouldn't it be better to let everyone go to their own school systems and just fund and staff them all around the same?


----------



## Adriane (Feb 18, 2011)

*Re: Political Compass*



Pwnemon said:


> Unless i'm mistaken, by trying to maintain an equal quota, you're disbenefiting just as much rich as you are benefiting poor people. Wouldn't it be better to let everyone go to their own school systems and just fund and staff them all around the same?


So the rich stay richer and the poor stay poorer? As someone aspiring to become a teacher, I honestly don't want to teach here in South Carolina -- the schools are awful, the pay is bad.


----------



## Aisling (Feb 18, 2011)

by suggestion of newt, this derailing of that Political Compass thread will now be redirected here.

Give me a few moments to move related posts from that thread to this one...


----------



## Pwnemon (Feb 18, 2011)

*Re: Political Compass*



			
				Vixie ♥;469014 said:
			
		

> So the rich stay richer and the poor stay poorer? As someone aspiring to become a teacher, I honestly don't want to teach here in South Carolina -- the schools are awful, the pay is bad.





newt said:


> Starting to suspect the communication gap here is Pwnemon not knowing that the different districts don't all have the same funding. The argument that doing what he is suggesting might contribute to furthering inequality might strike him as totally alien.
> 
> But yeah: The districts that are, say, projects? (Or, as Vixie suggests, the entire state of South Carolina?) They aren't collecting the money needed to run a good school.  This is why people who live in those places will try to send their kids to other places.


So if an entire district/state is poor, i can see how that would increase a rich/poor rift, but what I don't see is how bussing people around a district is going to help that problem if every school is at a consistently horrible level. If anything, wouldn't it just spend money that could be put in other parts of the budget to improve the schools?


----------



## Aisling (Feb 18, 2011)

Okay uh, that should do it! Anyway



			
				Vixie ♥;469014 said:
			
		

> So the rich stay richer and the poor stay poorer? As someone aspiring to become a teacher, I honestly don't want to teach here in South Carolina -- the schools are awful, the pay is bad.


Same here, and I'm just learning more and more about how awful it is in AP Gov, since we talk about relevant issues and all and there's that thing going on in Wisconsin. I mean, in Tennessee you don't even have to go to college to be a teacher! I mean just wtf, South.

also should this be in srs bsns? Other mods feel free to move but we've had more heated threads in Misc. Disc. so I guess it's fine


----------



## Crazy Linoone (Feb 19, 2011)

*Re: Political Compass*



Pwnemon said:


> So if an entire district/state is poor, i can see how that would increase a rich/poor rift, but what I don't see is how bussing people around a district is going to help that problem if every school is at a consistently horrible level. If anything, wouldn't it just spend money that could be put in other parts of the budget to improve the schools?





Superbird said:


> That's the thing. There are no schools that are horrible. In fact, the better ones happen to be in these "gang zone" areas.


----------



## Aisling (Feb 19, 2011)

Crazy Linoone said:


> Pwnemon said:
> 
> 
> > So if an entire district/state is poor, i can see how that would increase a rich/poor rift, but what I don't see is how bussing people around a district is going to help that problem if every school is at a consistently horrible level. If anything, wouldn't it just spend money that could be put in other parts of the budget to improve the schools?
> ...


uh, see



newt said:


> Superbird said:
> 
> 
> > That's the thing. There are no schools that are horrible. In fact, the better ones happen to be in these "gang zone" areas.


protip: newt's picture links to an article which is perfectly contrary to Superbird's statement so you might want to think twice about quoting Superbird to counter Pwnemon's post bro


----------



## Superbird (Feb 19, 2011)

Amendment to the previous statement. No schools in the district in question are actually bad schools. It's just that some of the better ones (mine, as an example) happen to be right in the middle of a "gang zone" in an African-american neighborhood. I've actually never seen any gangs there, and I cannot remember a single code-red lockdown that was not "just a drill", so...

Summary: Elaborating on my situation.


----------



## Aisling (Feb 19, 2011)

That doesn't mean all schools in gang zones are better than schools not in gang zones...?


----------



## Superbird (Feb 19, 2011)

As far as I know, they're all about the same. It depends on whether you want sports, academics, arts..


----------



## Crazy Linoone (Feb 19, 2011)

Spike said:


> protip: newt's picture links to an article which is perfectly contrary to Superbird's statement so you might want to think twice about quoting Superbird to counter Pwnemon's post bro


Uh, I was actually trying to point out that "horrible schools in gang zones" don't apply to Superbird, whose school district is the topic of the discussion right now. I'm not trying say that _all_ schools in gang zones are good or there are no terrible schools.


----------



## Aisling (Feb 19, 2011)

Crazy Linoone said:


> Uh, I was actually trying to point out that "horrible schools in gang zones" don't apply to Superbird, whose school district is the topic of the discussion right now. I'm not trying say that _all_ schools in gang zones are good or there are no terrible schools.


Oh, sorry. I figured we were just talking about school districts in general... since a thread concerning _one_ school district would be kind of silly? The thread just happened to start with Superbird's complaint about his school district because that's where the derailing from the Political Compass thread began. >; I think that's what most people have in mind too, I wasn't the only person who got the impression I got from that combination of quotes.

@ Superbird: Uh, I think you've lost me. Are you saying that even schools in gang zones are about as good as schools that aren't in gang zones... because even if the kids' grades suck horribly they're way better at sports or arts or something to make up for it?...
Because, uh, where I live we don't even have gang zones and there are still huge differences between the schools as far as quality and infrastructure and grades and stuff go, even accounting for... sports and arts... they're just kind of terrible in general compared to others.


----------



## Pwnemon (Feb 19, 2011)

Spike said:


> @ Superbird: Uh, I think you've lost me. Are you saying that even schools in gang zones are about as good as schools that aren't in gang zones... because even if the kids' grades suck horribly they're way better at sports or arts or something to make up for it?...
> Because, uh, where I live we don't even have gang zones and there are still huge differences between the schools as far as quality and infrastructure and grades and stuff go, even accounting for... sports and arts... they're just kind of terrible in general compared to others.


This.


----------



## Superbird (Feb 19, 2011)

This is why I never go to Serious business anymore.I suck at saying things.

Sorry for confusing you. What I sorta meant was that it's pretty much the same teaching quality everywhere, and where you go really depends on what extracurricular activities the school is good with.

Their argument is also "I don't want my kid riding the bus because it's unsafe". Most people I've talked to, and myself as well, don't even notice anything except it takes longer to get home.


----------



## Crazy Linoone (Feb 19, 2011)

Spike said:


> Oh, sorry. I figured we were just talking about school districts in general... since a thread concerning _one_ school district would be kind of silly? The thread just happened to start with Superbird's complaint about his school district because that's where the derailing from the Political Compass thread began. >; I think that's what most people have in mind too, I wasn't the only person who got the impression I got from that combination of quotes.


This is the reason I don't post at Serious Business anymore because I fail at making coherent statements :(


----------

